A framework for evaluating ad fraud papers. Can be effectively used by anyone in the media, brands, trade bodies and where making the right decisions based on information is vital. The two key points are: - you should consider it marketing (bs) unless proven otherwise - you don't have to be a subject matter expert to evaluate a paper made by "experts" 9 out of 10 papers are marketing, and in some ways deceptive marketing.

1. AD FRAUD RESEARCH GUIDELINES
SESSION 3.1

2. 3.1
RESEARCH
PUBLICATION
EVALUATION

3. Avoids use of sensational language
1

4. Methodology is explained
2

5. Data sources are explained
3

6. Caveats are disclosed
4

7. Similar work is referenced
5

8. Future work is outlined
6

9. Claims are substantiated
7

10. Evidence is provided
8

11. Was responsibly disclosed
9

12. Remedy is possible without
working with the authors
10

13. Findings can be validated
independently by 3rd-parties
11

14. Individual authors are named
12

15. Collaboration by more than
one entity
13

16. Is it peer-reviewed
14

17. Endorsed by 3rd-parties
15

18. WEAK MODERAT
E
STRONG
Avoids use of sensational language
Methodology is explained
Data sources are explained
Caveats are disclosed
Similar work is referenced
Future work is outlined
Claims are substantiated
Evidence is provided
Was responsibly disclosed
Remedy is possible without working with the authors
Findings can be validated independently by 3rd-parties
Individual authors are named
Collaboration by more than one entity
Is it peer-reviewed
Endorsed by 3rd-parties

19. END OF SESSION 3.1

20. 3.1
RESEARCH
PUBLICATION
EVALUATION